***********************************************

WORLDWIDE FOREST/BIODIVERSITY CAMPAIGN NEWS

Update on US Environmental Legislation

***********************************************

Forest Networking a Project of Ecological Enterprises

June 2, 1995

OVERVIEW & SOURCE

As most of you are aware, the new US Congress has been in a mad

rush to dismantle environmental legislation; including

restrictions on logging and endangered species protection.

Following is a sample letter urging Senators to make US

environmental laws and regulations more effective and efficient,

not to weaken or reverse them. There is then a update of the

major legislative efforts to weaken environmental laws; including

at what point in the process each is. This item was posted in the

en.alerts conference of econet.

*******************************

RELAYED TEXT STARTS HERE:

/* Written 4:31 AM Jun 2, 1995 by anichols in igc:en.alerts */

/* ---------- "letter to Senators" ---------- */

Forwarded by Austin Nichols <anichols>

for EcoNet <econet>

------- Forwarded Message Follows -------

Date: Tue, 30 May 1995 17:19:20 -0700

From: Edie Farwell <efarwell>

To: econet

Subject: plz post where appropriate - thanks

URGENT!!

Following is a letter urging Senators to make US environmental

laws and regulations more effective and efficient, not to weaken

or reverse them.

Also included is a summary of legislation currently pending on

Capitol Hill that will affect the environment, and a list of US

Senators by state. Feel free to reword the letter or use it as is.

Send copies to your Senators and those running for President in

1996 (Dole, Gramm, Lugar, Specter).

And please pass this information on to friends so they can do the

same. We must flood Capitol Hill with such letters to make our

voices heard and our concerns known, and to try to make a

difference!

May 1995

Senator

United States Senate

Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator:

I write to ask that you not retreat from the commitment to protect

our natural environment. Our goal as a nation must be to save

species, conserve the natural world around us, and protect human

health - all of which are inextricably interlinked - with the most

efficient and effective means possible.

We have made a great deal of progress over the past 25 years.

Several types of air and water pollution have been significantly

reduced through existing legislation. The Endangered Species Act

has achieved remarkable success in retrieving the bald eagle and

many other species from the brink of extinction. Ironically,

because many do not realize that environmental legislation has

been successful, it is considered expensive and ineffectual by

many, too easily minimized and criticized. In fact, America's

system of environmental protection is widely regarded as a model

for other nations to follow.

But we still have a long way to go. Two out of five Americans

still breathe unhealthy air and at least 40% of the nation's

waterways are not yet fit for drinking, fishing or swimming. A

National Biological Service study found that natural ecosystems,

amounting to more than half the area of the contiguous 48 states

and involving entire communities of species, have declined to the

point of endangerment as a result of human activity.

Diversity of species is essential for our continued well-being.

Saving species requires saving their habitats. Except for a few

special interests, the American people strongly support the

Endangered Species Act formed by consensus 22 years ago. The Act

must be strengthened, not weakened, for it benefits us as much as

it does the plants and creatures around us. If we do not protect

endangered species, we stand to lose life-saving medicines,

productive agriculture, abundant fisheries and genetic secrets of

diverse life forms - all of inestimable value to ourselves and our

children.

The Clean Air and Clean Water Acts could be more efficiently

administered, but their goals must not be weakened. The heavily

polluted Central Europe of today could be the America of tomorrow

without them. I ask that you oppose H.R. 961 when it is introduced

to the Senate. The experiment with voluntary compliance has

already been tried; its failure is what made environmental

protection laws essential.

I also urge you to vote against Takings legislation of any kind.

Its passage would render many U.S. agencies incapable of enforcing

U.S. laws. Americans will begin to wonder why they should honor

the laws of this nation if their legislative body belittles its

own legislation so as to make it unenforceable.

While risk assessment and cost-benefit analysis are not bad in

theory, in practice they would be disastrous, protracting the time

required to enforce regulations and significantly increasing the

costs of implementing environmental protections. In addition,

because it is often difficult if not impossible to quantify all

the benefits accrued from an environmental law and the risks posed

by doing nothing, such studies tend to lead an agency to ignore a

problem. How does one place a true economic value on continued

existence of the bald eagle, a human life, or clean air? Is it

even valid to believe that we can? For these reasons I ask you to

oppose S. 343.

As recently as February, polls indicated that Americans

overwhelmingly supported tough environmental rules and were

willing to pay more for them. Current polls also show that the

American people want more effective environmental protection.

Clear thinking should play a greater role in how we achieve our

goal of a clean environment, using the most efficient and cost-

effective means available. But this goal must be met. Protecting

our environment means, ultimately, protecting ourselves as a

species. It is important to work together toward reaching this end

in order to do what is best for the nation as a whole. To

paraphrase President Theodore Roosevelt, politicians must act for

the good of the many rather than in the interest of the powerful

few.

I appreciate your honest reflection and attention to these

matters. I will be watching your actions over the coming months

with great anticipation.

Sincerely,

**************************************************************

Signed into law -

Under H.R. 889 - Defense Supplemental Appropriations Bill - Ban on

listing of new species under Endangered Species Act, $1.5 million

cut for endangered species listing and habitat designation.

Passed Congress and Pending Presidential Decision -

S. 617 - Waives federal laws that regulate logging on public land.

This eliminates ability to publicly appeal proposed timber cuts

and could lead to dramatic increases in timber cutting on national

forests and Bureau of Land Management lands. Timber cutters would

no longer be required to comply with the Clean Water Act,

Endangered Species Act, National Forest Management Act, and other

environmental protection statures.

Passed House and Pending in Senate -

H.R. 9 = S. 605 (?) "Takings Legislation" and S. 343 Risk

Assessment and Cost-Benefit Analyses (Part of "Contract with

America") Introduced to Senate by Dole, Gramm, Hatch; even more

environmentally devastating than H.R. 9

Takings Legislation - effectively requires that tax payers pay

neighbors, corporations, etc. not to pollute if environmental laws

cause the potential profits or speculative values of any part of

their land to be diminished by 20% or more, according to H.R. 9.

Agencies (funded by taxpayers) enforcing environmental laws

would have to compensate corporations, etc. for the difference; if

agencies didn't have the funds with which to pay, they could not

enforce the laws.

[Many in Congress are also trying to drastically cut funding or

EPA, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and other agencies concerned

with environmental protection.]

Risk Assessment and Cost-Benefit Analysis - government agencies

enforcing existing human health, safety, and environmental laws

must publish three reports each time they enforce the law:

1) risk assessment;

2) assessment of costs and benefits;

3) analysis comparing economic and compliance costs with the

likely benefits to human health and the environment.

Not bad in theory, but in practice they greatly increase the time

it takes an agency to implement new regulations, and significantly

increase the costs of implementing environmental protections.

Also, because it's often difficult to quantify all the benefits

accrued from an environmental law and all the risks posed by doing

nothing, these studies tend to lead an agency to not address a

problem.

Pending in Both Chambers of Congress -

H.R. 961 - Guts the Clean Water Act of 1972 (Has now passed in the

House) Would loosen national standards for treatment of industrial

wastes before they are discharged into public sewers and would

eliminate requirements to control polluted runoff. Compliance

under such legislation would be voluntary. Drastically narrows

definition of which wetlands need federal protection, without

scientific foundation, making at least half the nation's currently

regulated wetlands available for development and industrial use.

Wetlands provide habitat for wildlife, filter polluted water,

absorb flood waters.

*Drafted by the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee

with help from industrial lobbyists, without comment from

conservation organizations or the EPA. The committee failed to

wait for National Academy of Sciences report, the result of a two-

year study requested by Congress.

Just Introduced to Congress -

Legislation that would cripple the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

Introduced by Senator Gorton (R-WA) in early May. Currently the

ESA prohibits landowners from modifying or degrading the habitat

of endangered species in a way that kills or injures wildlife

(as of 1975). Drafted by lobbyists representing timber, mining,

ranching and utility interests, which have contributed sizably to

Sen. Gorton's reelection campaign. Sen. Gorton said he didn't

consult with environmentalists because he already knew their

views.

**************************************************************

Note: Most of the above information is from the New York Times,

Congressional offices, and the Sierra Club.

Addresses:

Senator (Name)

United States Senate

Washington, D.C. 20510

[OR, for Representatives:

Representative (Name)

House of Representatives

Washington, D.C. 20515]

Capitol Hill Switchboard:

202-224-3121

The White House:

202-456-1414 (Tel)

202-456-2461 (Fax)

###RELAYED TEXT ENDS###

You are encouraged to utilize this information for personal

campaign use; including writing letters, organizing campaigns and

forwarding. All efforts are made to provide accurate, timely

pieces; though ultimate responsibility for verifying all

information rests with the reader. Check out our Gaia Forest

Conservation Archives at URL=

http://forests.lic.wisc.edu/forests/gaia.html

Networked by:

Ecological Enterprises

Email (best way to contact)-> gbarry@forests.org

Phone->(608) 233-2194 || Fax->(608) 231-2312